“The referee was in the act of blowing his whistle to stop play. The action is not reviewable”

SAN JOSE — More coming later, but here’s the official response I got this morning from the NHL on the apparent — and missed — goal by Tommy Wingels in overtime of last night’s game. It comes from Frank Brown, NHL vice-president of content integration:

“The referee was in the act of blowing his whistle to stop play. The action is not reviewable.”

More coming later, of course. For a more detailed explanation, look here for what HNIC’s Elliott Friedman posted a short while ago.

David Pollak

David Pollak has been following the NHL forever and at the Mercury News as an editor or reporter since 1987. For almost a decade he wrote about the Sharks as the paper's Fan in the Stands before joining the sports department in 2001. He became the Sharks beat writer before the 2007-08 season and began this blog at that time. You can also follow him on Twitter at @PollakOnSharks.

First issue: The review system is flawed if reviews are initiated based on TV broadcast replays. Is there not a continuous live feed of the above the goal and goal cams going directly to Toronto? If there are these feeds, how does Toronto miss this and not review it? If Toronto doesn’t get these live feeds, why not?

Second issue: There was no intent to blow the whistle by Leggo until after the puck had been kicked out of the goal. CSN Bay Area showed a reverse angle on their post game show that clearly showed Leggo first wave off the post shot, then stick his head forward and skate towards the crease looking for the puck when Miller had no idea where the puck was. The puck had already gone in and was kicked back out when Leggo finally starting moving his whistle upwards to blow the play dead and give another waving motion.

G-bum-man

Angry Dan–You are spot on with your narrative of the ACTUAL events. What a load of crap. The NHL should just admit that they blew it. That is more infuriating than the actual blown call–that they try to whitewash it with that lame “ref in act of blowing whistle” excuse.

Gilfan

this was a CYA response from the league, total BS. This is worse than saying “yep, we missed it”.

Brian Schwartz

Exactly, Dan.

I can (begrudgingly) accept the explanation that the referee simply missed the puck crossing the line in real time and even accept that the league’s video review staff missed it, too. Even the CSN crew didn’t spot it until a few minutes after the fact. It’s rather egregious that the video review folks missed it when that is their sole job, but I can still accept human error.

But don’t give me that nonsense about “the referee was in the act of blowing his whistle to stop play.” That is a blatant lie. He wasn’t. Not even close.

He waved off the initial post shot yes, but then as Dan said, the puck was still loose, Wingels shot (and scored), and THEN Leggo skated in a full 2 seconds after the puck crossed the line to wave his arms a second time and finally blow the play dead.

Leggo had NO intention of blowing the play dead on the initial shot off the post, and it wasn’t until long after Wingels put the puck in (which is plenty obvious in real-time, so don’t try to hide behind “judging it in slow motion”).

Matthew

This league tries to be relevant in the North American sports landscape…the game itself is a great watch.

But, the league office is a joke. The inconsistent suspensions, the bad calls followed by b*llsh*t justification…the ref was NOT in the act of blowing his whistle, or even considering it. He lost sight of it and lazily skated up and then waved his hands. He missed it. So b it. Toronto missed it…less acceptable….and then the excuse making. Totally and categorically unacceptable. Again. As usual.

Bettman is a joke. Shanahan is a joke. The players, coaches, trainers, support staff give everything they have to present a pure, clean , honest, hard working effort. The league screws it up. Again.

ice

this is exactly what i expected. why would the NHL purposefully claim they messed up? also, the intent to blow the whistle” rule has got to be one of the worst rules in professional sports.

WI JP

Bad call. Happens in every sport. No amount of complaining will change it. Realistically, Sharks didn’t play a two point game anyway.
Maybe it is just me but the last couple Shark games have not been compelling. Sense a lack of intensity.
For example, early fight was a complete yawner. I do like Kennedy’s attitude, however.
Long season. JP

Hockeynut

Angry Dan as I said in the other thread if ANYONE had indicated (the goal judge, the coaches, the players) that a goal had been scored Toronto would have reviewed it. As it was no one suspected a goal was scored (except Myers and he wasn’t talking) so no, there is no obligation for Toronto to review a routine play. Now AFTER the fact when the TV guys noticed a goal was scored was far too late to “call Toronto” No, they don’t monitor every second of every game, they only get involved when asked. No one asked.

Angry Dan

It was the only game on at the time. If Toronto is not monitoring every second of an OT game that’s the only game that’s being played, and they don’t have every single feed on, including the above the goal cams and the inside the goal cams, then why even bother having all those monitors in their situation room?

Hockeynut

For replays when requested. If someone had requested a replay review, you would have gotten one. No one on the ice besides Myers saw the puck cross the line real time. Not even the goal judge.

Clemenza

The Sharks probably won’t be getting much benefit of the doubt from the “League” in these types of situations anytime soon since Doug Wilson basically told them they were full of garbage with the Torres suspension.
Unfortunate, but that’s life.

Angry Dan

There is no request needed from the ice. I have seen it many times. Toronto and the on-site video replay official can call down to the ice whenever they want to request a delay of a face-off so they can review.

Alaskan_ice

I agree that the Sharks didn’t play well enough. That doesn’t mean they didn’t win the game. Teams that don’t deserve to win happen all the time. It doesn’t matter. Welcome to Sports.
The issue is that the NHL blew this one. The fact that our Sharks lost a point is because they blew it.

Clemenza

Exactly…If his intent was to blow the whistle, why did it take him 5 freaking seconds to blow it??

WI JP

AK, the Sharks did lose the game, even if wrongly so.
Clem, let’s hope your opinion is garbage.
Hopefully, interest on my end will increase with Van coming to town. JP

DieHardShark (DHS)

2 of the worst rules in all of sports are in the NHL

1- The Refs intent to blow the whistle (way to much gray area there)
2- Puck must cross goaline before 0.00…..(why not as long as shot is off the stick before 0.00 and goes in it should count like all other sports)

Tom (fm Quinzee)

I have to begrudgingly agree with you. To illustrate the point – if play continues and Buffalo goes down the ice and scores, then the Sharks call time, then there’s all the review, what happens? Tell Buffalo, “nice goal, but it didn’t count because the goal we missed did count.” Well, that may be the right thing, but it gets messy. A worse scenario is that an injury occurs in the interim. The game officials and, IF there is still one, the goal judge blew this.

What the Sharks deserved is a different question. Lots of teams win games they deserve to lose. I agree they deserved to lose. But they scored a goal that wasn’t allowed. And if the goal judge isn’t sure, now that there’s the video review in Toronto, they should err on the side of lighting the lamp.

DieHardShark (DHS)

Havlat is back ….since his return sharks look slow and no jump at all 0-0-3 w/ havlat 10-1-1 w/o havlat

ZEKE

Complete BS explanation.

They simply missed it. The cover up is worse than the truth.

ZEKE

exactly Alaska

MLBSF

Lame explanation by the NHL.
Even lamer performance by the Sharks losing to the worst team in the league.

Embarrassing on both accounts.
smh

Tom (fm Quinzee)

To answer my own question, from Wikipedia:

“Goal judge

“The goal judge determines whether a player has scored a goal by watching to see if the puck has crossed the goal line completely. They act only in an advisory role; the referee has the sole authority to
award goals, and thus can override the opinion of the goal judge.

“One goal judge is positioned outside the rink directly behind each goal net. For arenas so equipped, the goal judge turns on a red light behind the goal to signal a score. The red light (and the green light
which is mounted next to it) are hooked up to the game clock: when the clock is stopped or the green light is turned on when the game clock reads 00.0, the red light cannot be turned on.

“In 2006, the NHL began experimenting with goal judges in higher seats (most commonly the press box, a catwalk or the lower section of the upper deck) with wireless signals. The idea was to allow teams to sell
the lower seats, but also to give officials a better view of the action as to be able to reject goals if violations (illegally kicked in, player in the crease, offside) took place. As of 2010, all teams except for Boston (where TD Garden is used for amateur hockey also, most notably the Beanpot), Florida and Montreal locate goal judges in higher seats. In Vancouver and Nashville, one of the two goal judges is directly behind the net.

“Goal judges were first used around 1877 in Montreal, and were initially called umpires.[4]”

I hadn’t paid attention to this – I just assumed that the ref did talk to the goal just because they went to Toronto. If the goal judges were still behind the nets, this might not have happened. Not certain, but a guy behind the net would have seen this.

Tom (fm Quinzee)

Matthew, I have to burst your bubble a bit here. This league is very, very relevant in a large chunk of North America. It’s called “Canada.”

mn_test347

2. Because each period is 20:00 minutes long.

mn_test347

1. I suspect if you look up why this rule was made, it likely has something to do with the ref not being able to get the whistle to his mouth whilst trying to avoid being crushed by ten other skaters that couldn’t care less if he lives or dies.

LTNC

If it wasn’t for the WWE, the NBA, FIFA, and the NCAA the NHL would be the biggest joke in the sports world.
In the act of blowing the whistle, my lower lip. It has either been blown or not, there is no in the act.

mn_test347

Exactly. Because there are never any bad calls in baseball, or football, or basketball…

Cozy Powell III

Yeah yeah I get it about the review proh-cess. However, the issue is the fact that Mike Leggo is a blind, incompetent boob. His job, while he’s standing 5-6 feet away, is to notice that round black thing go across that line there. He didn’t and he sucks.

J B

One such comment seen about the league’s “explanation”:

“you rake, i’ll shovel…”

J B

Leggo blew the call. That’s his job there and he failed to do it. Toronto didn’t do their due diligence in checking the entire play (Mike Murphy’s admission of this is awash in “optics” metaphors) because they were busy verifying Leggo’s first call.

That the goal judge missed it or that the Sharks didn’t play well is secondary to the simple fact the ref at the goal didn’t see the puck go in at a critical moment and the safety net of Toronto’s video review failed too. Darn sporting of the league to stretch the “intent to blow” rule wide enough to cover Leggo’s lengthy mistake.

Bob Holly

In a game that is lightening fast and judged by miliseconds, intention to blow the whistle is the most gravest of rules.

Matthew

Tom, I think you get my point…it’s a money grab between sports like football, baseball, hockey, basketball, etc.

I think many Canadians are as disgusted with Bettman and the league. These incidents do not help promote the sport.

Matthew

Google Jim Joyce… Best response ever by an arbiter to a blown call…it would be nice if others would.

G-bum-man

The reason Leggo couldn’t see the puck go in is because Myers skates INTO the goal and sweeps the puck out with his skate. There should be a rule that when a defender (other than the goalie) skates into the goal to prevent a scoring chance, the play is automatically reviewed.

Or give each coach 1 challenge per game. If they challenge and get the call wrong–lose their timeout.

DieHardShark (DHS)

what does that have to do with it?

Elliot Lepler

I sent an email to the NHL demanding they take responsibility for their error.
Everyone on this board should do the same. Use the website feedback.

The NHL damages its integrity with the stupid explanation. They need to hear from their customers.
Mistakes happen and they can improve systems–but only if they are acknowledged.

Nathan_aka_TheRealTeal

It isn’t Havlat at all and one play i recall had crisp passing, havlat included, that led to a goal. Right now the most correlating factor is Burns, but it isn’t his fault the sharks are playing lazy and taking undisciplined two many men on the ice penalties etc. i’ve been disappointed last couple of games but i know they eventually turn it around.

dontbeasheeple

Agreed. We never should have gone to overtime. We made a couple of key mistakes in our end that resulted in Sabre goals. We have to be better when teams go hard on the forecheck.